About your Search

20130201
20130209
STATION
CSPAN 5
CSPAN2 3
WHUT (Howard University Television) 1
LANGUAGE
English 17
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
year, mr. brennan called those legal, ethical and wise and the highest counterterrorism standard to limit the loss of civilian life. here's what he had to say in april of 2012. >> i stand here as someone who has been involved in our nation's security for more than 30 years. i have a profound appreciation for the truly remarkable capabilities of our counterterrorism professionals and our relationships with other nations and we must never compromise them. i will not discuss the sensitive details of any specific operation today. i will not, nor will i ever publicly divulge sensitive sources and methods, for when that happens our national security is endangered and lives could be lost. at the same time, we reject the notion that any discussion of these matters is a step on to a slippery slope that endanger our national security. too often, that fear can become an excuse for saying nothing at all, which creates a void that is then filled with myths and falsehoods. that, in turn, can erode our credibility with the american people and foreign partners and undermine the public's understa
for your introduction, if that is agreeable. mr. brennan, congratulations on your nomination. i would like to welcome your family as well. i hope you will introduce them so the committee can give them its thanks. this is the first opportunity also to welcome our new members senator heinrich is on my right, senator king who is due any moment, senator collins on my left, and senator coburn, who is not here at the moment but who will be, who is returning to the committee. we have a new ex-officio member, senator inhofe. welcome to all of you. the director of the cia is among the most critical national security positions and the united states government. but because of the role the cia plays in collecting and analyzing intelligence relevant to every national security challenge we face and because of the added importance of having steady leadership at an organization that conducts most of its business outside of the public arena, intelligence is critical to the successful draw-down in afghanistan, to the brutal war going on in syria, across north africa where the attacks in benghazi and hostage
, no response required. mr. brennan, that is your shop. do you have any knowledge about why senator graham's question was not to be answered? >> there is a longstanding tradition understanding of respecting the executive privilege that exists in the presidency in terms of what information is provided to the president or advice, counsel, to him. i would suspect that that question gets into this issue of the executive privilege which i think again has been a long standing tradition. >> are you sure that is the answer or to you think? >> i do not understand, because that will not be a request coming to me. >> i understand, so my direction to you, at what i ask you, is that you review that. we will get you the and -- we will get youppi if necessary., efficient ca alice told us it was detainee information that was key to them finding the courier and bin laden. were you briefed by any of the analysts who track down bin laden? >> before the operation? but yes. >> yes, absolutely. >> is that the information given to you, that it came from interrogation of detainees on whom eip's had been used? >>
, but there are others are not. and so i think there is a lot of questions out there for mr. brennan. >> after leaving the c.i.a. in november 2007, brennan defended the enhanced methods saying they have, quote, saved lives. today brennan offered this explanation. >> i had expressed my personal objections and views to my agency colleagues about certain of those eit's such as water boarding, nudity and others where i professed my personal objection to it. but i did not try to stop it because it was something that was being done in a different part of the agency under the authority of others. >> another key question has been high profile leaks which critics say were strategically done to make mr. obama look tough. brennan says he's not the subject of a probe or target. he's a witness. chris. >> mike emmanuel on capitol hill, thanks for that. the confirmation vote fort next defense secretary was held up until the current pentagon chief agreed to answer questions about last september's terrorist attack in libya. today a senate panel got to question leon panetta, national security correspondent jennifer gri
for director of the c.i.a., mr. john brennan. he said, quote, hezbollah started out as purely a terrorist organization back in the early 1980's and has evolved significantly over time . and now it has members of parliament, in the cabinet, lawyers, doctors, others who are part of the hezbollah organization and so quite frankly i'm pleased to see that a lot of hezbollah individuals are in fact renouncing that type of terrorism and violence and are trying to participate in the political process in lebanon in a very legitimate fashion. they have not sworn off violence in lebanon. they have not sworn off violence in egypt, in syria, as we well know, in libya, albania, tuesday nearbyia -- tunesia, even in african nations further south. i said before, expressed my concern that this administration by helping them, encouraging them to overthrow this nation's ally, president mubarak, express concerns before it was done about giving military assistance to people that we knew, including al qaeda, to joe throw a man who had blood on his hands but since 2003 had been this nation's and this administrat
left there in 2005. at the white house they are emphasizing brennan's experience. >> mr. brennan brings, i think, not on a vast amount of experience, but a significant perspective on the battles that we wage in this effort. and the right way to conduct them. so the president believes the senate should and will confirm john brennan expeditiously. >> reporter: expect him to get questions about how involved he was in interrogation techniques at the cia. rick: senator lindsey graham will be at today's hearing on benghazi. the top carolina republican joins us later right here in america's newsroom. martha: just hours to go before the cia nominee john brennan testifies. mr. brennan helped manage the drone program. he is very supportive of it and has spoken out on it's times. it represents a concession about it white house, do it not? >> reporter: it does. the president acting a week and a half after a group of bipartisan senators asked for the legal opinion that justifies drone attacks against americans abroad. but others say it doesn't answer how much evidence the president needs. does he ne
[inaudible] >> please, proceed, mr. brennan. the next time we will clear the chamber and bring people back in one by one. this witness is entitled to be heard, ladies and gentlemen. please, give him that opportunity. >> to keep it a heartfelt thank you customize family in new jersey, a 91-year-old mother and 92-year-old father who emigrated from ireland nearly 65 years ago. >> [inaudible] i have a list of the names -- >> we're going to halt the hearing. i will ask the room be cleared and the codepink associates not be permitted to come back in. we have done this five times now. five times are enough. >> that is just what they did, cleared the hall. eight codepink activists were arrested. that is an excerpt from tuesday's confirmation hearing for john brennan to head the cia. we're joined by one of the protesters who was in the confirmation hearing, there to interrupt him before capitol police removed her and doesn't others, medea benjamin, founder of codepink -- and a dozen others, medea benjamin, founder of codepink. can you talk about going to pakistan protesting drones, then coming back
that mr. brennan should have to go through in the senate. and as i understand it, he will, because you can't have a foreign policy that is delivered by leak to the american press. it's dangerous. we know it has cost us sources. we know it cost us operations. we know it put in jeopardy, at least a part of the time members of our special forces units that may have been involved in those raids. we had to protect their families. so it is really, really important that they get the notion that yes, foreign policy is hard but you have to sell it in a way that does not disclose classified information. and that's been concerning it me. i hope that they have gotten that message. i think today we'll hear a lot about that when the senate does their questioning of mr. brennan. jenna: congressman, thank you very much for the time today. i know it is a busy one as always for you in capitol hill. we always appreciate you joining us, thank you. >> thanks, jenna. jon: fascinating topics on the front burner today. one lawmaker calls senator marco rubio of florida a lynchpin in getting immigration reform done
. >>steve: it is mr. brennan's appearance before this committee today for his confirmation that lawmakers feel if we're ever going to get answers regarding the program, it's now. that's why it is extraordinary and probably a little coincidental that they would go ahead and relent and release it to the lawmakers today. >>brian: here's what's good about it. we're going to get real questions from both sides rather than what a great guy you are, what a horrible person you are, and speech making. wur going to get both sides probing john brennan in a respectful way, i believe, to legitimize some of the tactics when he was working counterterror for the center. charles krauthammer looks at constitutional hurdles and why in some ways this could be challenging. >> they want to pretend you can only hit an american al qaeda operative who is an imminent threat and define him in a threat out of existence by saying al qaeda is continually hatching plots, so he's always, all day and all night, an imminent threat, i.e., that criteria is meaningless. i think we really have to have an effort in the congress
, we would all be paying attention to mr. brennan who is the nominee to be director of central intelligence and who has himself a history of some controversy on both the heft and the right ironically. so if we could just talk about what the implications of this are, and i'm going to try and put these two questions together, actually, and to digress and explain this question a little better, many of us who work in foreign policy studied history because that's what draws you in. and in the old days polysci and ir were fields that weren't exactly embraced as they are now, and for those of us who did study history, a hot remember that all these inconsequential and rather interesting countries whether it was the czechoslovakias or malis of the time were the precursors to larger battles that could have been dealt with had they been dealt with early. i wonder if just sort of thinking through that prism where we see things going, but maybe take the nominees, and i'm going to just throw it open and see who grabs the mic first. tom. >> okay. you're putting it in front of my face, you kne
it as terrorist attack, and that was my view. >> and mr. brennan, who is going to be having a hearing later today that i won't be attending. i consider him to be one of the foremost intelligence experts around with twenty or twenty five years experience. would you agree with that? >> yes, indeed. >> he stated to me and will state again this afternoon the same thing you just said. that we realized at that moment it was a planned terrorist attack. now, the only question i want to ask you i'll ask you for an answer now and i doubt if you'll have a good answer. but after that i'd like to have you think about it and give an answer for the record. that is with everyone agreeing including the secretary clinton that right after this took place, that was in fact a planned terrorist attack. how in the world could ambassador rice say, quote, the information this is five days later -- the information the best information and the best assessment we have to date is that in fact this was not a preplained premeditated attack. >> no. again, i mean, i was not involved in the talking points. that were presented to
mind. >> they knew that at the time and unequivocally is a terrorist attack. do you agree, mr. secretary agree, mr. secretary, it was an attack on the annex? >> i said it was three days. >> that is what john brennan said also been used unequivocably. sometimes someone has to ask the question, if that was true with this presentation by susan rice, before all of america is the fact was it was not a preplanned or premeditated attack. i will not ask you to respond to that the people understand everybody knew that it was free planned and premeditated attack. >> senator reid. >> hq secretary, as you point* out there were two attacks one of the compound and one on the annex. but the time chart indicates there is a significant gap on the first at midnight and the appointment of mortars and rpg's did that indicate it took awhile to organize themselves to conduct a full blown attack that that with general dempsey they seized an opportunity then supplement the firepower coordinating attacks suggesting there was improvisation with the planning? >> the second was much more deliberate and p
have been a terrorist attack. and of course the thing i'm getting -- do you agree, mr. secretary, that it was unequivocally a terrorist attack on the annex? >> when i appeared before this committee three days afterwards i said it was a terrorist attack. >> very good. that's what john brennan said also. he used the word unequivocally. i would have to say we have to understand sometimes someone's going to have to ask the question, if that was true and we knew all that on the sunday this presentation by susan rice, for all of america, said it was -- we have today is that the fact is -- was, this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack. unquote. i won't even ask you to respond to that but i think it's important that people understand that everybody knew on that sunday that it was a preplanned, premeditated attack. thank you for your tolerance, mr. chairman. >> senator reed. >> thank you, mr. chairman, thank you, mr. secretary, and mr. dempsey. as you point out in your testimony, two attacks, one on the compound, one on the annex. but as the time chart indicates, there seems to be a
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)